Getting Fit For A Cue

[drivermaker]

The anti-Predator thread got me to thinking about how sophisticated fitting a PGA tour golfer or any golfer for equipment was, and how primitive fitting someone for a cue is. Not only is it primitive, it's non-existent, other than having someone hit with 2 or 3 cues that might be available for trial. A PGA tour player has every possible measurement taken statically and dynamically to ensure perfect specifications to maximize performance and to have that occur immediately. There is no break-in period and getting used to the equipment like it was in the past. Pro's get it done by different manufacturers for free, but the non-pro can get it done also by professional custom fitters for between $60-$100 and is a sure fire way not to make a $1,500 mistake if buying a full set of clubs or $400 + for a driver.

Every week on this forum or others, someone is writing in and asking, "what do you think about (insert name) cues", or, "what do you think the difference is between (insert name) and (insert name) cues are"?
So, let me pose an hypothetical situation to see how we'd react to having different cues and parameters available before purchasing a cue to not make up to $3,000 mistakes as I've seen happen to some guys in the past.

What if someone had just about every production cue available to try in a fitting session: Cuetec, Action, Adam, Falcon, Lucasi, 5280, Helmstetter, Meucci's, Joss, Schon, and a Sledgehammer for breaking. And as far as shafts go, not only had the stock shaft that comes with each cue, but also had a Predator, Black Dot, or Red Dot to try on various cues. With each of those named cues, you also get a wide range of different joints to see if anything feels better, feels worse, or is indistinguishable.
5/16X14 stainless; 5/16X18 implex/nickel; 3/8X10 stainless; 3/8X10 wood to wood; accu-loc; and uni-loc.
And what if they also had almost every tip to try out, such as: lepro; moori; tiger; hercules; elk master; and talisman from soft to x-hard, along with sizes available from 12mm to 14mm.
And what if they had the ability to take a cue from 17.75 oz. and change the weight bolt out in .05 increments and take the cue up to 21.5 to see what fits your feel, tempo, and timing the best to maximize results for accuracy, spin, and speed control. And what if they had different grips availabe from wood (no grip), Irish linen, stack wrap, and leather to choose from.

Is this something that would benefit players in the game, or do you think the hit and miss guessing games that we have now is about as good as it's going to get? How many of you would go through the fitting process if it cost the same as a golf fitting? Do you think you would rather benefit immediately from having the exact cue which met your parameters and specifications as opposed to working your game and style around a new purchase that felt foreign and wasn't producing immediate results? Even if someone opted for a custom cue as opposed to a production cue, this fitting session could still be applied to the custom cue specs and be even more beneficial since a much larger investment is involved, I would think.

I'm just throwing out some ideas...what are yours?

 

[Williebetmore]

Drivermaker,
EXCELLENT idea (and actually possible too). As an admitted science geek I would definitely sign up.

 

[JPB]

One problem is that the feedback is more objective in golf. Launch angles and such tell the player he hits it say 295 with one set of specs and 287 with another and 276 with the third or whatever. In pool, players talk about nonsense half the time. They don't have any objective feedback. They might be playing with something demonstrably horrible that they say is good. Yes, feel matters, but I would bet that you could put a great playing cue in somebody's hands and half the people would reject it based on some subjective basis. Yes, feel is important. Yes, preferences matter some. But pool players never measure objective things. take for example weighting. A lot of people swear by forward weighting. They say they like the feel. OTOH, people looking at the physics tend to go for a more back weighted cue. WHich is right? I tend to agree with the anti-forward weighting folks. I THINK forward weighting could decrease stroke accuracy a little. Can I test it? No. Have I tested it? No. By trial and error I think my cues that are balanced correctly stroke better. But there is no way to really prove it.
Deflection is another thing. Seems like the players who really study it say go with a stiff shaft. Jewett playes with small tipped stiff shaft cues. So do all billiard players. But some pool players argue and say you want a 13 mm tip with a lot of flex. How about a head to head comparison for the player? That could be done. Here, hit this shot with a stiff shaft, medium shaft, soft shaft. Compare how the cueball reacts. This could be easily done. And then players could vary their shaft flex for the conditions, their game, and lastly, their subjective preference. It is hard to do that now. At least then players would KNOW how their cue compares to something else.

I am a little surprised schuler hasn't done this since they make so many different shafts. They could put together a simple fitting program with 3-4 butts and a dozen or so shafts. Have diagrams of shots for players to try and have them compare the effect of different stuff. Then customize length and balance maybe. Have somebody who knows the differences walk a player through a fitting. So then the player could see the difference right there between a flexible 13 mm shaft and a stiff tapered 12. Then maybe players would have some data to back up what they say their preferences are.

 

[drivermaker]

But pool players never measure objective things. take for example weighting. A lot of people swear by forward weighting. They say they like the feel. OTOH, people looking at the physics tend to go for a more back weighted cue. WHich is right? I tend to agree with the anti-forward weighting folks. I THINK forward weighting could decrease stroke accuracy a little. Can I test it? No. Have I tested it? No. By trial and error I think my cues that are balanced correctly stroke better. But there is no way to really prove it.
Deflection is another thing. Seems like the players who really study it say go with a stiff shaft. Jewett playes with small tipped stiff shaft cues. So do all billiard players. But some pool players argue and say you want a 13 mm tip with a lot of flex. How about a head to head comparison for the player? That could be done. Here, hit this shot with a stiff shaft, medium shaft, soft shaft. Compare how the cueball reacts. This could be easily done. And then players could vary their shaft flex for the conditions, their game, and lastly, their subjective preference. It is hard to do that now. At least then players would KNOW how their cue compares to something else.

That's a good point about balance and I was thinking about it in my original post but forgot to include it. I definitely think and know there IS a way to test it. As part of the fitting process, what if butts were available from under 14 oz. to over 17 oz., and in addition to the different joints that can lend to balance, you also had shafts that weighed in from 3.5 oz. to almost 5 oz. with the ability to interchange them on different weighted butts to get from 16" balance points to 20.5" balance points. After having than much leeway from high to low, you could definitely find out what works best while testing them on the table.

I think with all of the shafts that I mentioned in the post, you would easily be able to see the differences produced by flex, deflection, and tip size for accuracy, control, and maneuverability and compare your results with any variety of changes. And as it's true with golf, one guys set of specs that are perfect and straight from heaven, could be another players hell. Hence the ability to find that out right from the start without wasting money on one cue after another or a bunch of shafts that cost a fortune and don't work.

 

[JPB]

That's a good point about balance and I was thinking about it in my original post but forgot to include it. I definitely think and know there IS a way to test it. As part of the fitting process, what if butts were available from under 14 oz. to over 17 oz., and in addition to the different joints that can lend to balance, you also had shafts that weighed in from 3.5 oz. to almost 5 oz. with the ability to interchange them on different weighted butts to get from 16" balance points to 20.5" balance points. After having than much leeway from high to low, you could definitely find out what works best while testing them on the table.

I think with all of the shafts that I mentioned in the post, you would easily be able to see the differences produced by flex, deflection, and tip size for accuracy, control, and maneuverability and compare your results with any variety of changes. And as it's true with golf, one guys set of specs that are perfect and straight from heaven, could be another players hell. Hence the ability to find that out right from the start without wasting money on one cue after another or a bunch of shafts that cost a fortune and don't work.

There are some other things that should be tested and would require equipment. You need to test both cueball velocity and stroke speed I think. Maybe a player stokes better with a light cue or heavy cue. Test the speed of the tip at the limit where the player has some control. Then you need to test cue ball velocity. All other things being equal, the faster a cueball comes off a cue the better. That means the cue is transferring as much energy as possible into the ball. I would wager that flexible cues would cost both velocity and accuracy at speed. But hard to say. It would be interesting to see if you could measure objective parameters between cues with different joints, butt diameters, joint diameters, and shaft tapers. I think it would tell us a lot.

One great fitting tool for golf clubs is the impact board. You instantly see the effect of different lengths and lies and can adjust the contact to the middle of the clubface quickly. You don't have that in pool and I'm wondering how you could test different lengths and weights on cueball contact for a given player.

 

[drivermaker]

Jim Rempe training cue ball? That's the one with the most finite markings on it to see where the chalk mark is at impact.

 

[fast larry]

The anti-Predator thread got me to thinking about how sophisticated fitting a PGA tour golfer or any golfer for equipment was, and how primitive fitting someone for a cue is. Not only is it primitive, it's non-existent, other than having someone hit with 2 or 3 cues that might be available for trial. A PGA tour player has every possible measurement taken statically and dynamically to ensure perfect specifications to maximize performance and to have that occur immediately. There is no break-in period and getting used to the equipment like it was in the past. Pro's get it done by different manufacturers for free, but the non-pro can get it done also by professional custom fitters for between $60-$100 and is a sure fire way not to make a $1,500 mistake if buying a full set of clubs or $400 + for a driver.

Every week on this forum or others, someone is writing in and asking, "what do you think about (insert name) cues", or, "what do you think the difference is between (insert name) and (insert name) cues are"?
So, let me pose an hypothetical situation to see how we'd react to having different cues and parameters available before purchasing a cue to not make up to $3,000 mistakes as I've seen happen to some guys in the past.

What if someone had just about every production cue available to try in a fitting session: Cuetec, Action, Adam, Falcon, Lucasi, 5280, Helmstetter, Meucci's, Joss, Schon, and a Sledgehammer for breaking. And as far as shafts go, not only had the stock shaft that comes with each cue, but also had a Predator, Black Dot, or Red Dot to try on various cues. With each of those named cues, you also get a wide range of different joints to see if anything feels better, feels worse, or is indistinguishable.
5/16X14 stainless; 5/16X18 implex/nickel; 3/8X10 stainless; 3/8X10 wood to wood; accu-loc; and uni-loc.
And what if they also had almost every tip to try out, such as: lepro; moori; tiger; hercules; elk master; and talisman from soft to x-hard, along with sizes available from 12mm to 14mm.
And what if they had the ability to take a cue from 17.75 oz. and change the weight bolt out in .05 increments and take the cue up to 21.5 to see what fits your feel, tempo, and timing the best to maximize results for accuracy, spin, and speed control. And what if they had different grips availabe from wood (no grip), Irish linen, stack wrap, and leather to choose from.

Is this something that would benefit players in the game, or do you think the hit and miss guessing games that we have now is about as good as it's going to get? How many of you would go through the fitting process if it cost the same as a golf fitting? Do you think you would rather benefit immediately from having the exact cue which met your parameters and specifications as opposed to working your game and style around a new purchase that felt foreign and wasn't producing immediate results? Even if someone opted for a custom cue as opposed to a production cue, this fitting session could still be applied to the custom cue specs and be even more beneficial since a much larger investment is involved, I would think.

I'm just throwing out some ideas...what are yours?

Thats me, I do that, put out over 100 cues on the table and say take your pick. I do that at shows and at a lot of places.

 

[Bill Nelson]

I am looking for a cue now and went into a couple of pool halls and they wont let me play with the cue or chalk the tip, they say If I do that it becomes a used cue. How can I buy a cue if I can't play with it.

 

[drivermaker]

I am looking for a cue now and went into a couple of pool halls and they wont let me play with the cue or chalk the tip, they say If I do that it becomes a used cue. How can I buy a cue if I can't play with it.

That is exactly the point of this thread....when and how does anyone get the best cue possible for their game without trying different cues and all the different specs possible. However, based on the general slowness of responses to a possibility of this cue fitting thread, maybe the pool playing public isn't ready for the advanced methodology that's used in golf and other sports. Just pick a cue and get used to it, the old fashioned way. I liken it more to going to the eye doctor when he flicks those different lenses for the eye chart and he says, "Which one is better, this one...or...this one". "O.K. which one is better, this one...or this one". It would be as much a process of elimination for specs that don't work as specs that do, for the eyes as well as the cue.

 

[Purdman]

Selling Cues

Would you as a "New" cue buyer, want a cue that 15 people chalked and played with? Serious question. I have several cues that people wanted to buy, chalked um up, played, and returned. Some get chalk ground into the ferrule and shaft. Some even put dings in the shaft and butt. You can't sell em as new. We are talking $500 to $1,500 here. I got a $200 deposit on a cue Friday night. $550 cue, used. Came over to play Sunday, brought a bicycle over that he bought 5 years ago. Wanted to trade the bike for $250 of the balance. Saw my other cues, played with five of them and now wants a $1,050 cue for $850. His $200 deposit, the bike, and $400 cash. Wanted to take the cue with him and pay the $400 sometime in the next month or two. I don't want the bike, I ain't gonna front him the cue. Now he thinks I am a pri@k. I sold him a $895 custom Espiritu about three years ago. He used it for two weeks and brought it back. Begged me to take it back! I took it back, only to find out later that he banged it on the table and put a nick in the butt. Then he told me he didn't do it. Go figure. This is only one of many wanna buy stories. Please, tell me what you think people who sell cues should do. I am interested to know.
Don Purdy

 

[Frank_Glenn]

I am looking for a cue now and went into a couple of pool halls and they wont let me play with the cue or chalk the tip, they say If I do that it becomes a used cue. How can I buy a cue if I can't play with it.

This is wrong. The Pro Shop where I buy cues wants you to chalk the cue and shoot with it. Find somewhere else to buy your cue. I'm in Richmond, Va. If you are near here, go to Todd's Cue & Pro Shop.

 

[Bill Nelson]

This is wrong. The Pro Shop where I buy cues wants you to chalk the cue and shoot with it. Find somewhere else to buy your cue. I'm in Richmond, Va. If you are near here, go to Todd's Cue & Pro Shop.

Why cant they just wipe off the tip with water after I have shoot with it and it would look new again.

 

[diablo]

wow great idea!

i remember the blindfold tests in one of the jazz magazines i read and use to subscribe when i was working as a musician. you get an established recording artist, have him sit in the listening room and drain him with several tracks and ask him how the guitarist played these solos or how the piano player sounded over this part of the tune,etc. but in cues i think it will somehow work as in getting perspectives or the feeling one gets when he shoots with this or that brand of cue. but i guess it all falls to how well one can adjust not by the moment he shot with the cue but how he has lived with that specific cue for the longest time then its something one could ask if he likes it or not. the point is . there's no telling how a cue feels in your hands not until you really had lived with it. here in the philippines you see guys who are unknown to the eyes of the world. these filipino guys play better than most of the non filipino players we see on espn(no offense meant just establishing a point in the discussion) these filipino players are striving but because of lack of fundings to be pros and you will be surprised at some of the cues their using. some with warped shafts but because they have lived with that cue, they can run 4 to 5 racks of 15 ball rotation racks consecutively. just amazing.!